Our client wanted to ensure that their prostate cancer treatment was sufficiently differentiated from competitors in a crowded marketplace, creating a compelling story to convince HCPs that it is the best treatment available to use:

• Understand choice drivers and brand perceptions 
• Identify HCP profiles 
• Understand current information gaps 
• Deep dive on the importance and recall of data 

• Fathom review, uncover behavioural biases in existing market research 
• 10-minute fast association test pre-work for every respondent 
• 90-minute duos and 75-minute WATDIs across the EU5 with oncologists and urologists to give a total sample of n = 93 
• Radar materials audit to identify ways to leverage behavioural science in the detail aid

• We were able to provide a granular understanding of the prostate cancer landscape across the EU5
• We deep dived into the perceptions of the different prostate cancer treatments to understand the rational as well as emotional reactions to brands and advised potential areas for our client’s product to differentiate from competitors 
• We provided guidance about how the client could optimize their detail aid from our behavioural science review during the Radar audit 

Our client was working toward developing a comprehensive bladder cancer portfolio.  Foundational research was required to understand the complete patient journey across the bladder cancer space (non-muscle invasive, muscle invasive and metastatic) to identify unmet needs and pain points to develop communications and value add service to optimise opportunities for their portfolio of products.

• EU5 plus Benelux
• Multi-faceted approach, including Patient Soulmate™ duos, Patient WATDIs, Carer WATDIs, PSO WATDIs, and WATDIs with Oncologists and Urologists to ensure we accessed the full picture of the patient journey

• The research identified that there were many opportunities to start conversations about bladder cancer, between both patients, their carers and their doctors, to ensure patients felt they were receiving optimal care and support.  Core topics will need to be discussed in order to make sure patients feel that reassurance and hope for the future
• Research insights were supported by HRW’s in-house behavioural science unit, Shift, who helped to identify specific patient types / personas, relating to how they deal with their cancer.  Using this, we were able to provide our client with strategic communication recommendations that acknowledge that different personas are likely to be more motivated by one type of communication or support than another

A global client wanted to inform the medicine development strategy for a new treatment in the SCCHN space, in both the loco-regionally advanced, locally recurrent and metastatic setting. This research comprised two phases:

• Mapping: Understand current landscape and create a treatment algorithm
• Decision making: Explore drivers and barriers, including reaction to Product X in combination with IO and chemo 
• Future: What are the anticipated changes in treatment landscape and what data future treatments will need to offer and how combinations will be used

• Both study phases were conducted in the US, UK, France, Germany and Japan comprising 60-minute WATDIs with Medical Oncologists and Radiation Oncologists (Phase 1) + HN surgeons and ENTs (Japan), whilst the second phase was conduced with Medical Oncologists.

Phase 1: Loco-regionally advanced and locally recurrent

• HCPs face a number of key challenges when treating and managing these patients, and few treatments offer some efficacy benefit, but at the expense of QoL through toxicity.  Product X was welcomed but a number of considerations would have to be taken into account when designing a clinical trial, including the need for biomarker testing and survival data in order to build a case for the treatment and drive earlier pathway use

Phase 2: Metastatic (de novo/relapsed)

• As for with patients earlier in the pathway, HCPs are keen to use Product X and anticipate that the current paradigm will change, though concerns about sequencing need to be taken into account
• Minimally acceptable improvement in OS for this regimen to be considered = 6-12 over and above the standard of care (i.e., CisRT), on average
• In order to be widely prescribed, it would need to offer improvements of between 10 and 25%